What is it about?
In 2001, the incumbent Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago was removed from office by the President after his party ended up in an 18-18 tie after the general election. This decision by the President to remove the Prime Minister on the basis of a tie and also the fact that the Prime Minister's party won the popular vote raised significant constitutional questions which are explored in this article.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
The findings in this article reveal that Westminster conventions about permitting incumbent Prime Ministers to remain in office in cases where there are hung parliaments can be set aside in cases where written constitutions leave room for other interpretations.
Perspectives
Writing this article permitted me the opportunity to explore different methodologies for the appointment and re-appointment of Prime Ministers in Westminster-style systems in the wider Commonwealth by examining written constitutions in the Commonwealth Caribbean and measuring their provisions against Westminster conventions on this subject.
Dr Hamid A Ghany
University of the West Indies
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Parliamentary deadlock and the removal of the prime minister: Incumbency and termination theory in Trinidad and Tobago, Journal of Legislative Studies, March 2006, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/13572330500484987.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
